Watch The Yearly Kos Presidential Debate
Intro
Watch The Debate in 3 Parts
Part I
Part II
Part III
Another love fest for the Democrats....
Hillary Clinton continues with her lies in Part II (About pulling troops out of Iraq).
Also posted at Mirror On America.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
America's Forgotten Soldier
Much attention has been given to Pat Tillman in recent weeks, for the way that his family was misled about his death in Afghanistan. Army Pvt. Jessica Lynch has also received considerable media attention. Even the soldiers being Court martialed have received plenty of media coverage.
But there is one soldier who has hardly been mentioned. Most Americans are not even aware of this soldiers name. Yet her story is no less important than the Tillman or the Lynch stories. In fact, if Americans knew about her story, many would be saddened and outraged about the way that her family has been treated. I feel that if the truth were to come out about her case, it could easily dwarf the case of Pat Tillman. And the story of Jessica Lynch would not come close. Yet, for 2 years, the national media has ignored her case. (But there is plenty of coverage for Paris Hilton and Britney Spears).
The soldier that I speak of is Army Pvt. Lavena Lynn Johnson. She would have celebrated her 22nd birthday just a few days ago (July 27th). (picture)
This has to be one of the biggest stories in the Country that is not getting National Coverage.
Young Pvt. Lavena Johnson, was killed in Iraq on July 19th, 2005. Evidence in the case points to assault and murder. However, the Army has been covering up the killing, calling the soldiers death a suicide instead. The Army has refused to provide the family with key documents, and has ignored the families attempts to find answers in their daughters death.
Immediately after her death, the Army told the Johnson family that Lavena did not die from suicide. (1) But a few days later, the Army changed its story and called it a suicide by way of a self inflicted gunshot. The case was never properly investigated. The FBI should have taken over this case, once it appeared that foul play was involved.
The family put up an initial fight, but then the case faded.
Right after her death, I attempting to get more light shined on the issue. I wrote newspapers, and TV stations, without success. I guess they felt that it was more important to spend all of their time talking about Strippers like Anna Nicole Smith. I even attempted to get "Black Reporters" Tavis Smiley and Ed Gordon to cover this story, but neither of their programs ever responded to my e-mails via their websites.
I immediately saw red flags with this case, because the circumstances were so suspicious. First and foremost:
1. Lavena Johnson was not a candidate for suicide, based on all of the accounts that described her personality, demeanor, her spirit, etc. None of that pointed to suicide. Also, she was nearing the time when she would be coming home and had been making plans with her family.
2. Secondly, from a physical/scientific standpoint it would have been nearly impossible for her to shoot herself in the side of the head with an M-16 with her weak hand. The bullet wound was on the left side of her head, but Lavena was right handed. Typically this is not how a suicide would be done with an M-16 rifle. In addition, weapons residue & forensics tests showed that she did not even fire the weapon.
3. Her face and upper body showed signs that she had been beaten. She had a broken nose, a busted lip, and her front teeth had been knocked loose. The funeral service workers had to repair her face before her funeral. Other parts of her body also showed signs of trauma.
I did not want to push too hard at the time, because the family did not seem interested in dealing with the issue. They wanted to grieve instead.
But there are now new developments in the case, and the family is once again fighting for a new investigation. Local St. Louis TV Station KMOV Channel 4 covered the case this week, and even more evidence has surfaced in the case that was not previously reported. See video here. The new evidence supports the case that Lavena was brutally murdered in her tent.
This case should be brought to national prominence, because a disgusting injustice has been committed here. The killer or killers are out there walking free.
My theory on what may have happened to this young soldier? She was likely a victim of a rape or sexual assault of some kind, likely by superior officers or enlisted soldiers. In an effort to cover up their crime and keep her from telling anyone, they decided to kill her. The evidence in the case shows that the suspect (s) attempted to destroy evidence at the crime scene, including an attempt to try to set the crime scene on fire. The new information also shows that there was a blood trail leading outside from Lavena's tent. If she shot herself in the head with an M-16, then she would not have been able to get up and walk outside of her tent to create the blood trail. Another person would have had to do that.
OR an alternate scenario could be that Lavena was a witness to or knew of serious criminal activity involving officers or senior enlisted folks over there. She must have saw something or heard something, and her superiors knew that she could be a witness against them. In an effort to guarantee that she would not tell what she knew, someone decided to have her killed.
Either way, this case deserves National attention, and the FBI should get involved. From seeing other cases in Iraq involving Iraqi civilians, we know that these kinds of events have taken place. The problem with these kinds of cases involving soldiers overseas is that evidence is lost and potential witnesses and suspects are reassigned to other bases over a certain period of time. But this is exactly why this needs to be an FBI case, because any new case would involve several jurisdictions.
The Army’s Criminal Investigation Division (or CID), which is typically responsible for investigating crimes on Army installations, has proved that #1. It may not have the resources and/or the manpower to investigate such a complex case, and #2. It has shown that it is not trustworthy in terms of being an impartial entity in this case. This is especially important if the offender or offenders were Army officers…and if the Army itself is involved in this cover-up.
Let's bring national attention to this issue so that justice can be served...for Lavena, her family, and for the other young women in the military who may have found themselves in similar situations (or will in the future), and may not have known how to seek help if help was even available at all.
This kind of vile injustice (far worse than what happened to Pat Tillman) should not be allowed to stand.
____________________________
Fast Forward To April of 2007
This is a case that I have been following for a long time. It now looks as if things are finally beginning to move.... See video of latest developments here.
Johnson, a 19 year old soldier from St. Louis, was killed in Iraq in 2005. However, the suspicious circumstances surrounding her death point to murder and a government cover-up. The case has been stalled for several months, due to stonewalling by the Army. However, the U.S. Congress has now gotten involved in the case. This is the first sign of any significant national involvement. The case had basically been ignored on the national level, until now. It was only a local story.... But with the recent revelations about Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman and others, the Johnson case is finally getting at least some national attention.
Ironically.... if the truth comes to light in the LaVena Johnson case, it could easily dwarf the cases of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch (as if those cases were not bad enough). Yet, the Tillman & Lynch cases have gotten all the media attention.
It was blog activity (from several people) that kept this issue alive.
____________________________
Fast Forward to May of 2007
Lavena Johnsons body was exhumed and an independent autopsy was performed. The final report is still pending. The Army is still stonewalling the family and Congress regarding documents and other evidence in the case.
This is currently where the case stands.
The publics help is still needed to get this story on the national stage. Once in the spotlight, pressure could be brought to bare to force officials into action.
Please call or write your member of Congress. If you are a journalist or the editor of a newspaper or magazine, you could help by covering the story and getting the word out.
I am The Angry Independent.... writing from St. Louis, Missouri, and I run the blog Mirror On America.
_____________________________
See the original 2005 media report
See Here
Other Blogs and Reports on This Story
Johnson And Tillman Families Deserve Answers
Post from Waveflux
Much attention has been given to Pat Tillman in recent weeks, for the way that his family was misled about his death in Afghanistan. Army Pvt. Jessica Lynch has also received considerable media attention. Even the soldiers being Court martialed have received plenty of media coverage.
But there is one soldier who has hardly been mentioned. Most Americans are not even aware of this soldiers name. Yet her story is no less important than the Tillman or the Lynch stories. In fact, if Americans knew about her story, many would be saddened and outraged about the way that her family has been treated. I feel that if the truth were to come out about her case, it could easily dwarf the case of Pat Tillman. And the story of Jessica Lynch would not come close. Yet, for 2 years, the national media has ignored her case. (But there is plenty of coverage for Paris Hilton and Britney Spears).
The soldier that I speak of is Army Pvt. Lavena Lynn Johnson. She would have celebrated her 22nd birthday just a few days ago (July 27th). (picture)
This has to be one of the biggest stories in the Country that is not getting National Coverage.
Young Pvt. Lavena Johnson, was killed in Iraq on July 19th, 2005. Evidence in the case points to assault and murder. However, the Army has been covering up the killing, calling the soldiers death a suicide instead. The Army has refused to provide the family with key documents, and has ignored the families attempts to find answers in their daughters death.
Immediately after her death, the Army told the Johnson family that Lavena did not die from suicide. (1) But a few days later, the Army changed its story and called it a suicide by way of a self inflicted gunshot. The case was never properly investigated. The FBI should have taken over this case, once it appeared that foul play was involved.
The family put up an initial fight, but then the case faded.
Right after her death, I attempting to get more light shined on the issue. I wrote newspapers, and TV stations, without success. I guess they felt that it was more important to spend all of their time talking about Strippers like Anna Nicole Smith. I even attempted to get "Black Reporters" Tavis Smiley and Ed Gordon to cover this story, but neither of their programs ever responded to my e-mails via their websites.
I immediately saw red flags with this case, because the circumstances were so suspicious. First and foremost:
1. Lavena Johnson was not a candidate for suicide, based on all of the accounts that described her personality, demeanor, her spirit, etc. None of that pointed to suicide. Also, she was nearing the time when she would be coming home and had been making plans with her family.
2. Secondly, from a physical/scientific standpoint it would have been nearly impossible for her to shoot herself in the side of the head with an M-16 with her weak hand. The bullet wound was on the left side of her head, but Lavena was right handed. Typically this is not how a suicide would be done with an M-16 rifle. In addition, weapons residue & forensics tests showed that she did not even fire the weapon.
3. Her face and upper body showed signs that she had been beaten. She had a broken nose, a busted lip, and her front teeth had been knocked loose. The funeral service workers had to repair her face before her funeral. Other parts of her body also showed signs of trauma.
I did not want to push too hard at the time, because the family did not seem interested in dealing with the issue. They wanted to grieve instead.
But there are now new developments in the case, and the family is once again fighting for a new investigation. Local St. Louis TV Station KMOV Channel 4 covered the case this week, and even more evidence has surfaced in the case that was not previously reported. See video here. The new evidence supports the case that Lavena was brutally murdered in her tent.
This case should be brought to national prominence, because a disgusting injustice has been committed here. The killer or killers are out there walking free.
My theory on what may have happened to this young soldier? She was likely a victim of a rape or sexual assault of some kind, likely by superior officers or enlisted soldiers. In an effort to cover up their crime and keep her from telling anyone, they decided to kill her. The evidence in the case shows that the suspect (s) attempted to destroy evidence at the crime scene, including an attempt to try to set the crime scene on fire. The new information also shows that there was a blood trail leading outside from Lavena's tent. If she shot herself in the head with an M-16, then she would not have been able to get up and walk outside of her tent to create the blood trail. Another person would have had to do that.
OR an alternate scenario could be that Lavena was a witness to or knew of serious criminal activity involving officers or senior enlisted folks over there. She must have saw something or heard something, and her superiors knew that she could be a witness against them. In an effort to guarantee that she would not tell what she knew, someone decided to have her killed.
Either way, this case deserves National attention, and the FBI should get involved. From seeing other cases in Iraq involving Iraqi civilians, we know that these kinds of events have taken place. The problem with these kinds of cases involving soldiers overseas is that evidence is lost and potential witnesses and suspects are reassigned to other bases over a certain period of time. But this is exactly why this needs to be an FBI case, because any new case would involve several jurisdictions.
The Army’s Criminal Investigation Division (or CID), which is typically responsible for investigating crimes on Army installations, has proved that #1. It may not have the resources and/or the manpower to investigate such a complex case, and #2. It has shown that it is not trustworthy in terms of being an impartial entity in this case. This is especially important if the offender or offenders were Army officers…and if the Army itself is involved in this cover-up.
Let's bring national attention to this issue so that justice can be served...for Lavena, her family, and for the other young women in the military who may have found themselves in similar situations (or will in the future), and may not have known how to seek help if help was even available at all.
This kind of vile injustice (far worse than what happened to Pat Tillman) should not be allowed to stand.
____________________________
Fast Forward To April of 2007
This is a case that I have been following for a long time. It now looks as if things are finally beginning to move.... See video of latest developments here.
Johnson, a 19 year old soldier from St. Louis, was killed in Iraq in 2005. However, the suspicious circumstances surrounding her death point to murder and a government cover-up. The case has been stalled for several months, due to stonewalling by the Army. However, the U.S. Congress has now gotten involved in the case. This is the first sign of any significant national involvement. The case had basically been ignored on the national level, until now. It was only a local story.... But with the recent revelations about Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman and others, the Johnson case is finally getting at least some national attention.
Ironically.... if the truth comes to light in the LaVena Johnson case, it could easily dwarf the cases of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch (as if those cases were not bad enough). Yet, the Tillman & Lynch cases have gotten all the media attention.
It was blog activity (from several people) that kept this issue alive.
____________________________
Fast Forward to May of 2007
Lavena Johnsons body was exhumed and an independent autopsy was performed. The final report is still pending. The Army is still stonewalling the family and Congress regarding documents and other evidence in the case.
This is currently where the case stands.
The publics help is still needed to get this story on the national stage. Once in the spotlight, pressure could be brought to bare to force officials into action.
Please call or write your member of Congress. If you are a journalist or the editor of a newspaper or magazine, you could help by covering the story and getting the word out.
I am The Angry Independent.... writing from St. Louis, Missouri, and I run the blog Mirror On America.
_____________________________
See the original 2005 media report
See Here
Other Blogs and Reports on This Story
Johnson And Tillman Families Deserve Answers
Post from Waveflux
Monday, August 06, 2007
Okay, one more post and then this bitch has to practice some bitchitude back home.
A bitch has lost my share of car keys…my favorite tube of MAC lipstick whilst at the club…and my wallet more than once (wince).
But this bitch is having a hard time wrapping my mind around losing 190,000 AK-47 assault weapons in a war zone.
I’m also struggling with the news that the pentagon didn’t track those weapons by serial number.
For the love of all that’s holy, the Girl Scouts track cookie sales by serial number! Is it too much to ask the Pentagon to do the same for AK-47s?
Jesus!
Okay...okay, okay...I just read this story about warrantless eavesdropping and I think I may have a solution to the problem of locating the missing weapons.
Instead of listening in to my personal conversations with discussing how fucked up it is that the Pentagon lost 190,000 guns that are most likely going to be used against American soldiers which means my tax money just armed the insurgency…mercy…why not used all that nifty technology to listen in to Iraqi conversations and see if anyone there is chatting about a shitload of AK-47s?
Or mayhap listen in on some Pentagon conversations and find out just how many officials can't find their ass with both hands?
Blink.
Toodles.
Logs off to go order Thin Mints...
A bitch has lost my share of car keys…my favorite tube of MAC lipstick whilst at the club…and my wallet more than once (wince).
But this bitch is having a hard time wrapping my mind around losing 190,000 AK-47 assault weapons in a war zone.
I’m also struggling with the news that the pentagon didn’t track those weapons by serial number.
For the love of all that’s holy, the Girl Scouts track cookie sales by serial number! Is it too much to ask the Pentagon to do the same for AK-47s?
Jesus!
Okay...okay, okay...I just read this story about warrantless eavesdropping and I think I may have a solution to the problem of locating the missing weapons.
Instead of listening in to my personal conversations with discussing how fucked up it is that the Pentagon lost 190,000 guns that are most likely going to be used against American soldiers which means my tax money just armed the insurgency…mercy…why not used all that nifty technology to listen in to Iraqi conversations and see if anyone there is chatting about a shitload of AK-47s?
Or mayhap listen in on some Pentagon conversations and find out just how many officials can't find their ass with both hands?
Blink.
Toodles.
Logs off to go order Thin Mints...
A certain Mitt Romney is tired of a lot of shit.
He's tired of having Brownback pointing out the fact that Romney has switched his position on choice.
Blink.
Oh, and he’s tired of having to answer questions about being Mormon.
Ummm…well, he’s fine with that as long as he can talk about his family and so forth or use his faith as an excuse for going anti-choice.
Hmmm.
How’s about I toss out something new for Romney & Co. to chew on?
This bitch noticed that Mitt has five grown sons. I also noticed that Romney is decidedly pro-war…which was surprising since he didn’t exactly get his Audie Murphy on back in the day over Vietnam.
Blink.
With five sons…five healthy adult sons…and America at war with the Army facing a recruitment problem …well, this bitch is curious about those Romney boys military service or lack there of.
Blink.
Or is the hypocrisy of asking others to put their life on the line for this fubar war when your own chil’ren sleep on a soft mattress safe at home another touchy topic?
What?
I’m just asking!
And shit, at least that’s a newish question (wink).
He's tired of having Brownback pointing out the fact that Romney has switched his position on choice.
Blink.
Oh, and he’s tired of having to answer questions about being Mormon.
Ummm…well, he’s fine with that as long as he can talk about his family and so forth or use his faith as an excuse for going anti-choice.
Hmmm.
How’s about I toss out something new for Romney & Co. to chew on?
This bitch noticed that Mitt has five grown sons. I also noticed that Romney is decidedly pro-war…which was surprising since he didn’t exactly get his Audie Murphy on back in the day over Vietnam.
Blink.
With five sons…five healthy adult sons…and America at war with the Army facing a recruitment problem …well, this bitch is curious about those Romney boys military service or lack there of.
Blink.
Or is the hypocrisy of asking others to put their life on the line for this fubar war when your own chil’ren sleep on a soft mattress safe at home another touchy topic?
What?
I’m just asking!
And shit, at least that’s a newish question (wink).
Oooh, a bitch was almost too excited about this guest blogging gig to sleep last night!
I had to use my trusted sleep relaxation technique, which involved imagining Ann Coulter handcuffed to a wall in my dream-based dungeon and being forced to watch Eyes on the Prize over and over and over again.
Sigh.
That one works every time, bless it.
Anyhoo, my name is Shark-fu of AngryBlackBitch.com and I will be your Mistress of Bitchitude for the day.
Shall we?
A woman announces she’s running for President and everyone assumes that a lot of shit is going to change…that she’s going to bring with her a knowledge of oppression, a different perspective, a different management style…you know, a "woman’s touch".
But the candidate that has emerged is an establishment candidate who knows the path and is sticking to it...big time.
Matthews (and he is in no way alone on this) would believe that Senator Clinton’s gender somehow trumps her political resume.
But I challenge the logic of that!
As a matter of fact this bitch finds it insulting.
Politics is littered with examples of the diversity of political perspective within womankind. Hell, that political spectrum includes Bay Buchanan’s rancid self and goes all the way over to the fantabulous Angela Davis!
I had to use my trusted sleep relaxation technique, which involved imagining Ann Coulter handcuffed to a wall in my dream-based dungeon and being forced to watch Eyes on the Prize over and over and over again.
Sigh.
That one works every time, bless it.
Anyhoo, my name is Shark-fu of AngryBlackBitch.com and I will be your Mistress of Bitchitude for the day.
Shall we?
While dining on a breakfast of Excedrin and coffee this morning, a certain Chris Matthews said something on The Today Show that caught my attention.
Yes, this bitch was shocked too (wink).
Chris was cranking through the political happenings of the weekend and dropping his sound bites like healthy fiber induced shits. He finished with some stuff on Hillary Clinton and how her admission at Yearly Kos that some of her friends are lobbyists may or may not hurt her with the base.
Then he said something along the lines of Clinton being the establishment candidate but not completely because “She’s a woman and that’s going to be a big change.”
Blink.
I popped some more Excedrin, shot back the rest of my coffee and then replayed that shit.
Senator Clinton is the establishment candidate for the Democratic Party but not totally because she’s a woman?
Hmmm.
Now that’s a juicy bone for Monday morning blogging!
Shark-fu’s random speculation over Senator Clinton’s establishment status while waiting for the meds to kick the fuck in and kill my hangover…
Yes, this bitch was shocked too (wink).
Chris was cranking through the political happenings of the weekend and dropping his sound bites like healthy fiber induced shits. He finished with some stuff on Hillary Clinton and how her admission at Yearly Kos that some of her friends are lobbyists may or may not hurt her with the base.
Then he said something along the lines of Clinton being the establishment candidate but not completely because “She’s a woman and that’s going to be a big change.”
Blink.
I popped some more Excedrin, shot back the rest of my coffee and then replayed that shit.
Senator Clinton is the establishment candidate for the Democratic Party but not totally because she’s a woman?
Hmmm.
Now that’s a juicy bone for Monday morning blogging!
Shark-fu’s random speculation over Senator Clinton’s establishment status while waiting for the meds to kick the fuck in and kill my hangover…
A woman announces she’s running for President and everyone assumes that a lot of shit is going to change…that she’s going to bring with her a knowledge of oppression, a different perspective, a different management style…you know, a "woman’s touch".
But the candidate that has emerged is an establishment candidate who knows the path and is sticking to it...big time.
Matthews (and he is in no way alone on this) would believe that Senator Clinton’s gender somehow trumps her political resume.
But I challenge the logic of that!
As a matter of fact this bitch finds it insulting.
Politics is littered with examples of the diversity of political perspective within womankind. Hell, that political spectrum includes Bay Buchanan’s rancid self and goes all the way over to the fantabulous Angela Davis!
That's diverse as a motherfucker.
But pundits have been giving Senator Clinton a pass of sorts by assuming they know her position on all things women are assumed to feel the same towards….reproductive choice, military force and domestic policy shit.
We’re months into this race and they are still struggling with that shit.
But pundits have been giving Senator Clinton a pass of sorts by assuming they know her position on all things women are assumed to feel the same towards….reproductive choice, military force and domestic policy shit.
We’re months into this race and they are still struggling with that shit.
And it wouldn’t matter...expect it matters.
This voter has had enough political surprises to last a lifetime.
Sigh.
As to those assumptions, this bitch prefers to judge a person on their actions and their record. If a candidate's background will equal change then a bitch should see that shit in their past and present behavior...not by gender alone.
Lest we forget, the women behind the fuck up that just keeps fucking are a constant reminder that women define change in a lot of different ways...
Saturday, August 04, 2007
More Guests on Monday:
Still to come while the Rude Pundit is soaking in saltwater - hey, was that just a flock of pelicans that went by? Those are some freaky motherfuckers, the Mitch McConnells of the seabird world, sitting calmly while swallowing living creatures whole - anyways, here's a reminder list:
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
The Rude Pundit's gotta go get a Bloody Mary, extra tabasco.
Still to come while the Rude Pundit is soaking in saltwater - hey, was that just a flock of pelicans that went by? Those are some freaky motherfuckers, the Mitch McConnells of the seabird world, sitting calmly while swallowing living creatures whole - anyways, here's a reminder list:
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
The Rude Pundit's gotta go get a Bloody Mary, extra tabasco.
Friday, August 03, 2007
Presidential politics, Hillary, Obama, bloggers and race matters
Remember the old saying, all that glitters is not gold? Or the other old saying I like better, "This is a bunch of bull-shit."
Well it appears that the media's love affair with Obama is fading fast. Check out the headlines Flubs Start To Pile Up For Obama or how about this one; Bumbling Obama.
Hold up, analyst are saying bloggers could play a big role in the 2008 election. I wonder if black political bloggers are part of that equation? let's see if the Afrospear and the AfroSphere Bloggers Association can make things happen for African American communities.
It seems that Obama may make it hard for a number of black bloggers to support him if he continues to screw up with talk of invading Pakistan. (Brother fucked up big time)
Who are Obama's advisors? Those comments coming from Obama, about invading Pakistan sound like George W. in black face.
Shit yeah I said it!
Hold up, those morons in Pakistan are criticizing Obama on his comments?
What gives them that right after letting Ben laden or whatever that ass holes name is, hide out in the mountains of Pakistan. but hey, Black Americans, like all Americans should take a serious and close look at Hillary and Obama, just like the government of Pakistan is doing right now.
Well not to worry, they both (Hillary and Obama) will be at the lilly white, YearlyKos forum. I'm sure they will get the backing of that organization. You know that guy Moulitsas thinks bloggers are softening hostility towards Clinton. Maybe the guys at the convention want to check out Hillary's now infamous, what do you call it cleavage.
Do you wonder what bloggers he speak for (just guess)??? The many bloggers who are attending the convention, of which 98% are probably white, with a majority white males.
AAPP: See I told you!
But hey you got to give it to the DailyKos or Yearlykos, or whatever they call themselves. They know how to get to Hillary and she knows how important "white bloggers" are. She has made every effort to change her schedule to attend a Q&A with YearlyKos to address the bloggers.
RAW STORY reports, Clinton originally did not plan on participating in the breakout session because she had to return to New York immediately after the forum Saturday night for a prior commitment, her campaign said. Billionaire Ron Perelman is hosting a $1,000-per-person Clinton fundraiser that night in the Hamptons on Long Island; it is part of a weekend-long series of fundraisers in the exclusive enclave that is expected to add $1 million to the New York senator's presidential campaign fund.
But hey, I guess that's how Democracy Works with white blogger types and presidential candidates - $1,000 plate dinners and a Yearly damn Ko.
Hey, but that is just my fucked-up opinion, maybe the next guest blogger has different opinions than mine, but guess what? Like the Rude Pundit, I really don't give a royal flying shit. Next up.... on Monday Angry Black Bitch.
Remember the old saying, all that glitters is not gold? Or the other old saying I like better, "This is a bunch of bull-shit."
Well it appears that the media's love affair with Obama is fading fast. Check out the headlines Flubs Start To Pile Up For Obama or how about this one; Bumbling Obama.
Hold up, analyst are saying bloggers could play a big role in the 2008 election. I wonder if black political bloggers are part of that equation? let's see if the Afrospear and the AfroSphere Bloggers Association can make things happen for African American communities.
It seems that Obama may make it hard for a number of black bloggers to support him if he continues to screw up with talk of invading Pakistan. (Brother fucked up big time)
Who are Obama's advisors? Those comments coming from Obama, about invading Pakistan sound like George W. in black face.
Shit yeah I said it!
What gives them that right after letting Ben laden or whatever that ass holes name is, hide out in the mountains of Pakistan. but hey, Black Americans, like all Americans should take a serious and close look at Hillary and Obama, just like the government of Pakistan is doing right now.
Well not to worry, they both (Hillary and Obama) will be at the lilly white, YearlyKos forum. I'm sure they will get the backing of that organization. You know that guy Moulitsas thinks bloggers are softening hostility towards Clinton. Maybe the guys at the convention want to check out Hillary's now infamous, what do you call it cleavage.
Do you wonder what bloggers he speak for (just guess)??? The many bloggers who are attending the convention, of which 98% are probably white, with a majority white males.
Hey, stop crying because I'm telling the truth. I'm not the only one saying this stuff, as the beltwayblogroll notes in their post, "The media have converged on Chicago for the second annual YearlyKos Convention that began today, and tens of thousands of words are bound to be written about the event before everyone leaves town after the weekend. But where were all the journalists a week ago when the BlogHer conference was held in the same locale? That's what Jennifer Pozner, the founder and executive director of Women in Media and News, wants to know. She thinks America's great female bloggers deserve as much attention as the "blustering A-list boys of the 'netroots.'"
"If many believe that blogging is a primarily male sport, it is partially because old-school gender disparities in resource allocation, power and popularity long entrenched in traditional news media are replicating themselves online," Pozner wrote in an article for the Women's Media Center.
"In the blogosphere, young men -- mostly white and mostly economically comfortable -- link to, write about, promote and fund their buddies' blogs; and corporate media play star-makers, quoting, profiling and featuring the punditry of this New Boys Network."AAPP: See I told you!
But hey you got to give it to the DailyKos or Yearlykos, or whatever they call themselves. They know how to get to Hillary and she knows how important "white bloggers" are. She has made every effort to change her schedule to attend a Q&A with YearlyKos to address the bloggers.
RAW STORY reports, Clinton originally did not plan on participating in the breakout session because she had to return to New York immediately after the forum Saturday night for a prior commitment, her campaign said. Billionaire Ron Perelman is hosting a $1,000-per-person Clinton fundraiser that night in the Hamptons on Long Island; it is part of a weekend-long series of fundraisers in the exclusive enclave that is expected to add $1 million to the New York senator's presidential campaign fund.
But hey, I guess that's how Democracy Works with white blogger types and presidential candidates - $1,000 plate dinners and a Yearly damn Ko.
Hey, but that is just my fucked-up opinion, maybe the next guest blogger has different opinions than mine, but guess what? Like the Rude Pundit, I really don't give a royal flying shit. Next up.... on Monday Angry Black Bitch.
Kick me in the balls and wake me up. So Hillary Clinton is refusing to rule out the use of nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden or other terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Damn and I thought George W Bush was a nut case.So... under a Hillary Presidency her administration will use the American nuclear arsenal to bomb the living shit out of Afghanistan and Pakistan? Like we used bunker busting bombs in Iraq.
A sort of, Hillary "Nuclear Shock and Awe."
Wait a minute there is more scary news from the leading DemoRATS who want to "out Republican - the Republicans."
It's O-BAMA, turn, he wants to use military force to go after terrorists in Pakistan, even without President Pervez Musharraf's permission. WTF! Now this Urban Cowboy and his New York Cowgirl (soon to be running mates) are ready to Shock and Awe the living shit out of the middle east. I'm hoping these two DemoRATS think long and hard before they start going into more Middle Eastern countries with American troops and American nuclear bombs.
It's truly scary that Hillary would even think that America should target Osama Bin Laden with nuclear weapons. Let's not even talk about O-BAMA's plans for the Middle East. I guess his administration will say there are WMD in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Sounds like George W to me. But hey, at this point the Democrats and Republicans are scaring the crap out of me.
Can these folks stop talking war and come up with a plan to fix America's fucked up bridges ?
Picture Source NY Times
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
The Upcoming Rude Guest Bloggers and a Haiku:
Before the Rude Pundit heads out on vacation (and, no, not at Yearly Kos), he wants to remind readers that he'll be aided and abetted in his mindless debauchery in the sun by a fine line-up of guest bloggers who'll keep the rudeness flowing. To wit:
Thursday, August 2: Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen
Friday, August 3: African American Opinion of African American Political Pundit
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
Enjoy these awesome writers here and at their own blogs. Hopefully, the Rude Pundit will resist the siren call of his laptop and only worry about who's topping his lap.
Before heading out, here's a haiku celebrating the Vice President's recent CNN interview.
When Dick Sat With Larry
"To me," said the corpse
To his foul, purulent guest,
"You smell like roses."
Before the Rude Pundit heads out on vacation (and, no, not at Yearly Kos), he wants to remind readers that he'll be aided and abetted in his mindless debauchery in the sun by a fine line-up of guest bloggers who'll keep the rudeness flowing. To wit:
Thursday, August 2: Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen
Friday, August 3: African American Opinion of African American Political Pundit
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
Enjoy these awesome writers here and at their own blogs. Hopefully, the Rude Pundit will resist the siren call of his laptop and only worry about who's topping his lap.
Before heading out, here's a haiku celebrating the Vice President's recent CNN interview.
When Dick Sat With Larry
"To me," said the corpse
To his foul, purulent guest,
"You smell like roses."
It Has Been Your Pleasure to Address the President:
Mucho has been written about the psychology of our President, the elected one, the not-Cheney, delving into the strange contours and twists of Bush's mind like explorers of ice caverns, wondering what cruel god would construct such a cold, lifeless, and maze-like place, a space where sound merely echoes off the frozen walls and all things eventually die. We've heard about his speech stumbles, his wanton cruelty, his sociopathy, his visceral contempt for opposition. But there's another cavern in there that deserves some mention: the way he reveals his unfulfillable ego. In other words, motherfucker thinks you should be so goddamned thrilled to be allowed to sniff his farts.
Just in the last week, Bush has let people know what a privilege it is to be near him. During his brief press meet with British PM Gordon "Not-Neutered Poodle" Brown, Bush was extolling to the UK leader how wonderful America is by pointing out, regarding a reporter who had just turned 38, "Here you are -- amazing country, Gordon, guy is under 40 years old, asking me and you questions. It's a beautiful sight." Oh, how everyone laughed, Brown a bit uncomfortably, as if he realized he was standing next to someone who would feel at home with both Charles Manson and Henry Ford. We could dismiss this as a mere joke if Bush hadn't done it so often in the past.
In a January 2005 "conversation" on Social Security "reform," Bush asked the age of an official at the Social Security Administration who was about to address him. Andrew Biggs said he was 37. Bush responded, "Thirty-seven, talking to the President. That's great." At another Social Security event in March 2005, he found out the age of a student asking him a question was 20: "[A]nd so here you are talking to the President about Social Security." And, at a Medicare prescription drug benefit "conversation" in April 2006, Bush found out that a Dr. Wang was from another place, making him exclaim, "Shanghai. And here he sits, as well, talking to the President of the United States." Bush had commented earlier about how great it was that an immigrant had gotten to sit next to him.
This is not to mention how splendiferous it is to exercise with George Bush if you've been horribly wounded in his war. Sgt. Christian Bagge, who lost both legs in Iraq, got that magnificent opportunity in June 2006, and Bush made sure he knew it: "I first met Christian when I went to Walter Reed -- or Brooke Army in San Antonio, Texas. And he said, 'I want to run with you.' He was in bed -- he had lost both legs. I looked at him, like, you know, there's an optimistic person. But I could tell in his eyes that he meant it. And after a lot of hard work and a lot of compassionate care, this fine man is here on the South Lawn running with the President."
(Apparently, though, when one loses one's legs and one meets the President, this is not an uncommon wish. Said Bush of Sgt. Neil Duncan last week, "Neil lost both legs, and he told me he's going to run with me on the South Lawn of the White House" and now Duncan's "running on the South Lawn.")
What's wonderfully disturbing here is how in awe of himself George W. Bush is, how elevated he believes he is, how he occasionally deigns to allow himself to be addressed by the little people, how noblesse oblige makes him a better person, how glad the lucky few should be that they were able to wash his balls, how we don't look at him when he says things like that and respond, "Uhhh, dude, I pay your fuckin' salary."
More later, including a brief comment on Dick Cheney dining on Larry King's pickled viscera.
Mucho has been written about the psychology of our President, the elected one, the not-Cheney, delving into the strange contours and twists of Bush's mind like explorers of ice caverns, wondering what cruel god would construct such a cold, lifeless, and maze-like place, a space where sound merely echoes off the frozen walls and all things eventually die. We've heard about his speech stumbles, his wanton cruelty, his sociopathy, his visceral contempt for opposition. But there's another cavern in there that deserves some mention: the way he reveals his unfulfillable ego. In other words, motherfucker thinks you should be so goddamned thrilled to be allowed to sniff his farts.
Just in the last week, Bush has let people know what a privilege it is to be near him. During his brief press meet with British PM Gordon "Not-Neutered Poodle" Brown, Bush was extolling to the UK leader how wonderful America is by pointing out, regarding a reporter who had just turned 38, "Here you are -- amazing country, Gordon, guy is under 40 years old, asking me and you questions. It's a beautiful sight." Oh, how everyone laughed, Brown a bit uncomfortably, as if he realized he was standing next to someone who would feel at home with both Charles Manson and Henry Ford. We could dismiss this as a mere joke if Bush hadn't done it so often in the past.
In a January 2005 "conversation" on Social Security "reform," Bush asked the age of an official at the Social Security Administration who was about to address him. Andrew Biggs said he was 37. Bush responded, "Thirty-seven, talking to the President. That's great." At another Social Security event in March 2005, he found out the age of a student asking him a question was 20: "[A]nd so here you are talking to the President about Social Security." And, at a Medicare prescription drug benefit "conversation" in April 2006, Bush found out that a Dr. Wang was from another place, making him exclaim, "Shanghai. And here he sits, as well, talking to the President of the United States." Bush had commented earlier about how great it was that an immigrant had gotten to sit next to him.
This is not to mention how splendiferous it is to exercise with George Bush if you've been horribly wounded in his war. Sgt. Christian Bagge, who lost both legs in Iraq, got that magnificent opportunity in June 2006, and Bush made sure he knew it: "I first met Christian when I went to Walter Reed -- or Brooke Army in San Antonio, Texas. And he said, 'I want to run with you.' He was in bed -- he had lost both legs. I looked at him, like, you know, there's an optimistic person. But I could tell in his eyes that he meant it. And after a lot of hard work and a lot of compassionate care, this fine man is here on the South Lawn running with the President."
(Apparently, though, when one loses one's legs and one meets the President, this is not an uncommon wish. Said Bush of Sgt. Neil Duncan last week, "Neil lost both legs, and he told me he's going to run with me on the South Lawn of the White House" and now Duncan's "running on the South Lawn.")
What's wonderfully disturbing here is how in awe of himself George W. Bush is, how elevated he believes he is, how he occasionally deigns to allow himself to be addressed by the little people, how noblesse oblige makes him a better person, how glad the lucky few should be that they were able to wash his balls, how we don't look at him when he says things like that and respond, "Uhhh, dude, I pay your fuckin' salary."
More later, including a brief comment on Dick Cheney dining on Larry King's pickled viscera.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Photos That Make the Rude Pundit Want to Down Six Kolonipin With a Bottle of Drano:
The President is jogging with two soldiers who have one leg between them. Army Sgt. Neil Duncan lost both of his when an IED blew up his Humvee in Afghanistan in December 2005. Army Specialist Max Ramsey lost one of his when an IED blew up his Humvee in Iraq in March 2006.
Ramsey made a request of the President, who said, "He wanted me to jump out of airplanes with him. I respectfully declined."
Yeah, it's a shame George W. Bush didn't have, say, fighter pilot training or something that'd make him feel at ease with a parachute.
Update: As rude reader Jim B reminds us, "Bush the elder would of parachuted with that soldier in a second [or at least promised that he would after, you know, he wasn't president anymore]. Still would today at age 85."
The President is jogging with two soldiers who have one leg between them. Army Sgt. Neil Duncan lost both of his when an IED blew up his Humvee in Afghanistan in December 2005. Army Specialist Max Ramsey lost one of his when an IED blew up his Humvee in Iraq in March 2006.
Ramsey made a request of the President, who said, "He wanted me to jump out of airplanes with him. I respectfully declined."
Yeah, it's a shame George W. Bush didn't have, say, fighter pilot training or something that'd make him feel at ease with a parachute.
Update: As rude reader Jim B reminds us, "Bush the elder would of parachuted with that soldier in a second [or at least promised that he would after, you know, he wasn't president anymore]. Still would today at age 85."
Why Is a Counterterrorism Wonk Being Nominated Inspector General of the EPA?:
This is one of those little things that you read on the White House website that, contextualized by all the rank evil committed by the Bush administration, makes you think, "What the fuck is up with that?" Because, see, we've reached a point with this White House where we know everything little thing they do has some political purpose (or is rewarding a crony, but that's just old school power playing).
In a personnel announcement this week, Bush nominated Andrew Cochran to be the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency. Cochran is a rabidly pro-war wonk and consultant who "advises clients on terrorism and homeland security, corporate governance, and appropriations issues," as well as founding the Counterterrorism Blog, which, while not exclusively neocon, is pretty much so, it's founder being somewhat Neanderthal. A glance at his full bio reveals extensive experience in the kind of auditing and management analysis that seems to be the job of the Inspector General of the EPA, although with a conspicuous lack of a background in, say, environmental issues.
It's that whole shift in his career that's bothersome. And chances are, this is just a case of a money-counting bureaucrat being put in a bureaucratic office to do the malignant destruction of the Bush administration under the guise of benign cost-cutting.
But we're way past being able to simply sit and benignly believe such things, not when we know that, say, EPA reports have had hard science edited out in order to support policies of the Bush administration. Not when we know that the politicization of the entire executive branch is the ultimate Soviet-like project of Karl Rove. Not when Cochran is in business with Republican Senator Conrad Burns, who thinks that global warming is just what's been happening since the Ice Age. In other words, what's the game here? Because it sure seems like somehow the EPA is poised to be forced to make decisions based on homelandsecurityterrorismohmyfuckinggodtheyregonnablowourshitup. Even more than it is now.
Thanks to George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, et pukin' al, we've earned the right to be suspicious, if not bugfuck insanely paranoid, about any little steps this administration takes. And that's a fine state of mind to keep your citizens in, no?
This is one of those little things that you read on the White House website that, contextualized by all the rank evil committed by the Bush administration, makes you think, "What the fuck is up with that?" Because, see, we've reached a point with this White House where we know everything little thing they do has some political purpose (or is rewarding a crony, but that's just old school power playing).
In a personnel announcement this week, Bush nominated Andrew Cochran to be the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency. Cochran is a rabidly pro-war wonk and consultant who "advises clients on terrorism and homeland security, corporate governance, and appropriations issues," as well as founding the Counterterrorism Blog, which, while not exclusively neocon, is pretty much so, it's founder being somewhat Neanderthal. A glance at his full bio reveals extensive experience in the kind of auditing and management analysis that seems to be the job of the Inspector General of the EPA, although with a conspicuous lack of a background in, say, environmental issues.
It's that whole shift in his career that's bothersome. And chances are, this is just a case of a money-counting bureaucrat being put in a bureaucratic office to do the malignant destruction of the Bush administration under the guise of benign cost-cutting.
But we're way past being able to simply sit and benignly believe such things, not when we know that, say, EPA reports have had hard science edited out in order to support policies of the Bush administration. Not when we know that the politicization of the entire executive branch is the ultimate Soviet-like project of Karl Rove. Not when Cochran is in business with Republican Senator Conrad Burns, who thinks that global warming is just what's been happening since the Ice Age. In other words, what's the game here? Because it sure seems like somehow the EPA is poised to be forced to make decisions based on homelandsecurityterrorismohmyfuckinggodtheyregonnablowourshitup. Even more than it is now.
Thanks to George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, et pukin' al, we've earned the right to be suspicious, if not bugfuck insanely paranoid, about any little steps this administration takes. And that's a fine state of mind to keep your citizens in, no?
Monday, July 30, 2007
Starting Thursday: A Week of Rude Guests:
It's that time of the year again, when the Rude Pundit takes his summer walkabout in Red State America. And since sometimes he needs to empty his brain for a little while in a way that doesn't involve a bottle of Jameson's, he's going to a beach in a place that's never heard of Senor Frog's. So he sent out a call to a few BWR's (Bloggers Who Rock) to get his back. Starting this Thursday, August 2, here's the way-cool line-up of guest bloggers:
Thursday, August 2: Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen
Friday, August 3: African American Opinion of African American Political Pundit
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, at least, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
Yeah, they're all African American bloggers. And they're A-game ass kickers who would make Bill O'Reilly eat his own arm on live television. So, while the Rude Pundit contemplates sand and surf and SPFs and MILFs and fiction books that don't involve scarred-headed wizard boys, the condo's open. Come on in and have a good time. The vodka's in the freezer, the take-out menus are in the tackle box, and the acid is hidden at page 108 of that new Dick Cheney book. The party starts Thursday.
Until then, you'll have your usual dose of rudeness.
It's that time of the year again, when the Rude Pundit takes his summer walkabout in Red State America. And since sometimes he needs to empty his brain for a little while in a way that doesn't involve a bottle of Jameson's, he's going to a beach in a place that's never heard of Senor Frog's. So he sent out a call to a few BWR's (Bloggers Who Rock) to get his back. Starting this Thursday, August 2, here's the way-cool line-up of guest bloggers:
Thursday, August 2: Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen
Friday, August 3: African American Opinion of African American Political Pundit
Monday, August 6: Shark-Fu of Angry Black Bitch
Tuesday, August 7: Angry Independent of Mirror on America
Wednesday, August 8: Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend, Pandagon, and, for August, at least, Americablog; and Terrance of Republic of T
Yeah, they're all African American bloggers. And they're A-game ass kickers who would make Bill O'Reilly eat his own arm on live television. So, while the Rude Pundit contemplates sand and surf and SPFs and MILFs and fiction books that don't involve scarred-headed wizard boys, the condo's open. Come on in and have a good time. The vodka's in the freezer, the take-out menus are in the tackle box, and the acid is hidden at page 108 of that new Dick Cheney book. The party starts Thursday.
Until then, you'll have your usual dose of rudeness.
Ten Reasons Why You Wouldn't Want to Be Married to Alberto Gonzales:
The Bush administration is aiding and abetting Alberto Gonzales in his attempt to weasel out of allegations of perjury. See, remember, Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee that, when he tried to put the testicle electrodes on a hospital-bedridden John Ashcroft in 2004, it wasn't about "the program the President discussed with the American people." Apparently, it was a more extreme version of the program, one that had been in place since 2001, that James Comey and Ashcroft didn't want to renew, probably one where the government just spied on whoever the fuck it wanted without warrant or cause.
In other words, Gonzales's defense is that it couldn't be perjury because the spying program he was talking about was revised after that meeting, so it couldn't have been the revised one because the revised one didn't exist until after the hospital face-off that nixed the extreme one. What fun. Makes one pine for the days of "what is is" and definitions of what acts legally comprise "sex."
And how cool must it be to be married to Alberto Gonzales. Think about the excuses (be sure you hunch over and slightly smirk and speak with a pussy little voice filled with barely contained contempt):
1. The garbage he was asked to take out at 5 p.m. is different than the garbage in the same bag after dinner at 8 p.m.
2. The woman he fucked is not the same woman she was before he fucked her because now she's swallowed his semen.
3. The dishes he was asked to do are not the same as the dishes in the sink now because the food has crusted on them.
4. The gay porn he was asked to get rid of is not the same gay porn he has now because it's crispy with new semen.
5. The lawn he was asked to mow last week is not the same lawn as it was because, well, lawns grow.
6. The dog he was asked to bathe earlier is not the same dog it is now because it's sticky with his semen.
7. The bills he was supposed to pay last month are not the same bills this month because credit cards accrue interest.
8. The hobo buried in the backyard is not the same hobo he killed last month because it's decomposing and, yeah, it's covered in his semen. And missing its eyes. Cheney must have visited.
9. The Paris vacation he took his wife on is not the same as the Paris vacation he promised her when they were young because Paris is more Muslim now.
10. The U.S. Constitution he follows is not the same U.S. Constitution that was created back in 1787 because it's been stained with...well, you get the idea.
The Bush administration is aiding and abetting Alberto Gonzales in his attempt to weasel out of allegations of perjury. See, remember, Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee that, when he tried to put the testicle electrodes on a hospital-bedridden John Ashcroft in 2004, it wasn't about "the program the President discussed with the American people." Apparently, it was a more extreme version of the program, one that had been in place since 2001, that James Comey and Ashcroft didn't want to renew, probably one where the government just spied on whoever the fuck it wanted without warrant or cause.
In other words, Gonzales's defense is that it couldn't be perjury because the spying program he was talking about was revised after that meeting, so it couldn't have been the revised one because the revised one didn't exist until after the hospital face-off that nixed the extreme one. What fun. Makes one pine for the days of "what is is" and definitions of what acts legally comprise "sex."
And how cool must it be to be married to Alberto Gonzales. Think about the excuses (be sure you hunch over and slightly smirk and speak with a pussy little voice filled with barely contained contempt):
1. The garbage he was asked to take out at 5 p.m. is different than the garbage in the same bag after dinner at 8 p.m.
2. The woman he fucked is not the same woman she was before he fucked her because now she's swallowed his semen.
3. The dishes he was asked to do are not the same as the dishes in the sink now because the food has crusted on them.
4. The gay porn he was asked to get rid of is not the same gay porn he has now because it's crispy with new semen.
5. The lawn he was asked to mow last week is not the same lawn as it was because, well, lawns grow.
6. The dog he was asked to bathe earlier is not the same dog it is now because it's sticky with his semen.
7. The bills he was supposed to pay last month are not the same bills this month because credit cards accrue interest.
8. The hobo buried in the backyard is not the same hobo he killed last month because it's decomposing and, yeah, it's covered in his semen. And missing its eyes. Cheney must have visited.
9. The Paris vacation he took his wife on is not the same as the Paris vacation he promised her when they were young because Paris is more Muslim now.
10. The U.S. Constitution he follows is not the same U.S. Constitution that was created back in 1787 because it's been stained with...well, you get the idea.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Why Bill O'Reilly Ought To Be Sodomized With a Microphone (Kos Edition):
Oh, sweet Bill O'Reilly, you of your various factors, what men and women of straw must you create each week to set aflame and hope that the smoke distracts your senior citizen viewers? It must be difficult, dear Bill, to keep finding the strength to tie together the bundles and light the torch. Yes, yes, what glee at long last, to have the head of Ward Churchill on your mantle, how you celebrated with a Talking Points editorial titled "The Demise of Ward Churchill," which seems to imply his death, but you only meant his career. 'Tis amazing, truly, yes, the way such threatening statements can simply be metaphors.
And how you danced your hideous jig of triumph when Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan stepped down from the campaign of John Edwards because you revealed to your shocked Abe Simpson-esque audience that bloggers are sometimes profane and caustic. Your neighbors must have cringed hearing your pained yowls of ejaculatory glee echoing through the night sky.
But that's naught compared to the favorite bugaboo of the right, commenters at left-wing blogs. Sweet mercy, how tender ears and eyes must be unduly protected if they come across the one in a thousand or so comments on Daily Kos that are oh-so mean, some even containing bad words or photoshopped images. Oh, the comfort of hyperbole, of egregious moral equation, where an Internet website mostly devoted to news analysis and political strategizing is the equivalent of an army that rounded up people and shipped them to camps where they were murdered by the score or to a group that lynched, castrated, and burned black men. Tell you what, dear Bill, when a gathering of Daily Kos writers in blue robes and hoods hangs a conservative from a tree, we can talk. (Oh, and by the way, the Rude Pundit's met David Duke and he's met Markos Moulitsas. Duke is much taller. Oh, and way creepier. Oh, and he wants to deprive non-white people of their civil rights. Moulitsas would like a government that doesn't advocate torture. It's a fine, but critical distinction.)
Sure, Bill, sure, you got JetBlue to weasel out of its sponsorship of Yearly Kos, but that's not enough for you. Now your mission is to get Democratic candidates to bail on speaking at the conference. Why? Is it out of heartfelt concern for Democrats? Or is it revenge for the Dems bailing on the Fox "news" debate because Kos and other sites pointed out the whole thing smacked of a set-up to degrade the candidates, like, you know, trying to embarrass them out of speaking at Yearly Kos?
So far in this little battle, oh, Bill, you've denied that hateful comments are featured on your website, despite the very clear fact that they are. And you promised on Tuesday to discuss "The Difference Between Liberals and the Far Left," but you never did say what distinguishes them. One can surmise that, to you, a "liberal" is Joe Lieberman and the "far left" is anyone who disagrees with you.
But, seriously, Bill, let's face facts here. Even Markos would probably say you are making much ado about a big nothing, although nothing's wrong with jacking up the traffic to the site. See, for the left, this is a distraction. We have a nation to save, so mostly we don't give a fuck what the Freepers or the O'Reillyites say, except when a comparison is needed. All the right has is the shards and shreds of an ideology and movement that blew up in their faces, like George W. Bush was a suicide bomber whose pack went off early. (Is that hateful? Well, fuck it. It was said out of hate.) What the fuck else are you going to attack, dear, sweet Bill O'Reilly? Sure, you'll find something, some crumb to tell your audience is a delicious loaf of bread. But Hillary Clinton's communications director was right when he said, "[T]he days where you can dictate where Senator Clinton and other Democrats go, who we talk to, are over."
And you know he's right, Bill. You're the media equivalent of a crack whore. You know about whores, eh, Bill? A crack whore sucks cock and lets herself get fucked in the ass because she needs that crack to keep herself sane. The problem is that the more cock she sucks and takes in the ass, the crazier she gets, the more crack she needs, and, because she's a pathetic crack whore, the kind who refuses any help, she'll suck off anyone waving a fin in her direction, getting lower and lower on the cock food chain until all that's left is blowing hobos for quarters, and no one who's got any respect is gonna bother looking in her direction.
Welcome to the issue gutter, Bill. Have a seat next to the rats, the garbage, and your fans.
Oh, sweet Bill O'Reilly, you of your various factors, what men and women of straw must you create each week to set aflame and hope that the smoke distracts your senior citizen viewers? It must be difficult, dear Bill, to keep finding the strength to tie together the bundles and light the torch. Yes, yes, what glee at long last, to have the head of Ward Churchill on your mantle, how you celebrated with a Talking Points editorial titled "The Demise of Ward Churchill," which seems to imply his death, but you only meant his career. 'Tis amazing, truly, yes, the way such threatening statements can simply be metaphors.
And how you danced your hideous jig of triumph when Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan stepped down from the campaign of John Edwards because you revealed to your shocked Abe Simpson-esque audience that bloggers are sometimes profane and caustic. Your neighbors must have cringed hearing your pained yowls of ejaculatory glee echoing through the night sky.
But that's naught compared to the favorite bugaboo of the right, commenters at left-wing blogs. Sweet mercy, how tender ears and eyes must be unduly protected if they come across the one in a thousand or so comments on Daily Kos that are oh-so mean, some even containing bad words or photoshopped images. Oh, the comfort of hyperbole, of egregious moral equation, where an Internet website mostly devoted to news analysis and political strategizing is the equivalent of an army that rounded up people and shipped them to camps where they were murdered by the score or to a group that lynched, castrated, and burned black men. Tell you what, dear Bill, when a gathering of Daily Kos writers in blue robes and hoods hangs a conservative from a tree, we can talk. (Oh, and by the way, the Rude Pundit's met David Duke and he's met Markos Moulitsas. Duke is much taller. Oh, and way creepier. Oh, and he wants to deprive non-white people of their civil rights. Moulitsas would like a government that doesn't advocate torture. It's a fine, but critical distinction.)
Sure, Bill, sure, you got JetBlue to weasel out of its sponsorship of Yearly Kos, but that's not enough for you. Now your mission is to get Democratic candidates to bail on speaking at the conference. Why? Is it out of heartfelt concern for Democrats? Or is it revenge for the Dems bailing on the Fox "news" debate because Kos and other sites pointed out the whole thing smacked of a set-up to degrade the candidates, like, you know, trying to embarrass them out of speaking at Yearly Kos?
So far in this little battle, oh, Bill, you've denied that hateful comments are featured on your website, despite the very clear fact that they are. And you promised on Tuesday to discuss "The Difference Between Liberals and the Far Left," but you never did say what distinguishes them. One can surmise that, to you, a "liberal" is Joe Lieberman and the "far left" is anyone who disagrees with you.
But, seriously, Bill, let's face facts here. Even Markos would probably say you are making much ado about a big nothing, although nothing's wrong with jacking up the traffic to the site. See, for the left, this is a distraction. We have a nation to save, so mostly we don't give a fuck what the Freepers or the O'Reillyites say, except when a comparison is needed. All the right has is the shards and shreds of an ideology and movement that blew up in their faces, like George W. Bush was a suicide bomber whose pack went off early. (Is that hateful? Well, fuck it. It was said out of hate.) What the fuck else are you going to attack, dear, sweet Bill O'Reilly? Sure, you'll find something, some crumb to tell your audience is a delicious loaf of bread. But Hillary Clinton's communications director was right when he said, "[T]he days where you can dictate where Senator Clinton and other Democrats go, who we talk to, are over."
And you know he's right, Bill. You're the media equivalent of a crack whore. You know about whores, eh, Bill? A crack whore sucks cock and lets herself get fucked in the ass because she needs that crack to keep herself sane. The problem is that the more cock she sucks and takes in the ass, the crazier she gets, the more crack she needs, and, because she's a pathetic crack whore, the kind who refuses any help, she'll suck off anyone waving a fin in her direction, getting lower and lower on the cock food chain until all that's left is blowing hobos for quarters, and no one who's got any respect is gonna bother looking in her direction.
Welcome to the issue gutter, Bill. Have a seat next to the rats, the garbage, and your fans.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Ann Coulter's Selective Brain (With a Smidgen of Plagiarism):
In her most recent "column", Coulter attacks the Democrats for a couple of their snarky remarks at the most recent debate. She focuses in on Barack Obama (who, she tiresomely reminds us, is middle-named "Hussein" - hey, guess what? Coulter's hero, Joseph McCarthy, has a first name that is pretty much the same as Stalin's - oooh, scary), who answered the "are you black enough?" question by saying how hard it is for him to catch a cab in New York City.
To counter Obama, Coulter brings up a Giuliani-era program: "He started 'Operation Refusal' in 1999, sending out teams of black undercover cops and taxi commissioners to hail cabs and give fines to those who refused to pick up blacks. Even back in 1999, in the first 12 hours of 'Operation Refusal,' out of more than 800 cabs hailed, only five cab drivers refused to pick up a customer — one of whom was a white woman with children."
In a column full of references to other New York Times articles, would it have killed Coulter to mention that she got this info from the Times? She could have quoted, even. Here's the strangely familiar paragraph from the November 13, 1999 article "Despite Warning, Some Cabdrivers Are Snared" by Somini Sengupta: "During the first 12 hours of the program, called Operation Refusal, teams of undercover police officers and taxi inspectors, black and white, hailed 817 cabs throughout Manhattan. Of those, five passed up customers because of their race or gender, police and taxi commission officials said. Among those cited was a driver on the East Side of Manhattan who refused to pick up a white woman with two children; instead, the cabby picked up an undercover inspector, a white male, nearby."
See? She could have quoted it directly, citing her source and everything, thus avoiding even the appearance of, you know, plagiarism.
Why wouldn't she? Oh, wait. Because the source article actually undermines her entire point. See, it wasn't just "black undercover police officers and taxi commissioners." They were actually "black and white." And they weren't just looking for racial bias; they were seeking gender bias, too. For Coulter, the fact that a cabbie didn't pick up a white woman proves there was no racial bias. For the undercover officials, it proves gender bias, which is one of the things that Operation Refusal seeks to halt. Also, perhaps one reason the number of cabbies caught is so low is that they were warned beforehand, something Coulter doesn't mention.
By the way, parts of the policy that Coulter praises were ruled unconstitutional, and cabbies who had their licenses suspended or revoked won a large settlement from the city because, like so many of Giuliani's policies, it overreached and was dictatorially run and was another get-tough measure by a power-hungry Giuliani seeking to become a Senator. Operation Refusal remains in a substantially modified form. It did not cure the problem of taxicab bias, as Coulter implies when she says there is "overwhelming evidence disproving...the yarn about blacks not being able to get a cab in New York."
And did anyone tell Coulter that the program was started because Danny Glover couldn't get a cab? Does Ann Coulter now support Danny Glover?
(By the way, regular readers will notice a different title than usual for Ann Coulter pieces on this merry blog. The Rude Pundit has made this one safe for the kiddies to link to, thus keeping his powder dry for the next time.)
In her most recent "column", Coulter attacks the Democrats for a couple of their snarky remarks at the most recent debate. She focuses in on Barack Obama (who, she tiresomely reminds us, is middle-named "Hussein" - hey, guess what? Coulter's hero, Joseph McCarthy, has a first name that is pretty much the same as Stalin's - oooh, scary), who answered the "are you black enough?" question by saying how hard it is for him to catch a cab in New York City.
To counter Obama, Coulter brings up a Giuliani-era program: "He started 'Operation Refusal' in 1999, sending out teams of black undercover cops and taxi commissioners to hail cabs and give fines to those who refused to pick up blacks. Even back in 1999, in the first 12 hours of 'Operation Refusal,' out of more than 800 cabs hailed, only five cab drivers refused to pick up a customer — one of whom was a white woman with children."
In a column full of references to other New York Times articles, would it have killed Coulter to mention that she got this info from the Times? She could have quoted, even. Here's the strangely familiar paragraph from the November 13, 1999 article "Despite Warning, Some Cabdrivers Are Snared" by Somini Sengupta: "During the first 12 hours of the program, called Operation Refusal, teams of undercover police officers and taxi inspectors, black and white, hailed 817 cabs throughout Manhattan. Of those, five passed up customers because of their race or gender, police and taxi commission officials said. Among those cited was a driver on the East Side of Manhattan who refused to pick up a white woman with two children; instead, the cabby picked up an undercover inspector, a white male, nearby."
See? She could have quoted it directly, citing her source and everything, thus avoiding even the appearance of, you know, plagiarism.
Why wouldn't she? Oh, wait. Because the source article actually undermines her entire point. See, it wasn't just "black undercover police officers and taxi commissioners." They were actually "black and white." And they weren't just looking for racial bias; they were seeking gender bias, too. For Coulter, the fact that a cabbie didn't pick up a white woman proves there was no racial bias. For the undercover officials, it proves gender bias, which is one of the things that Operation Refusal seeks to halt. Also, perhaps one reason the number of cabbies caught is so low is that they were warned beforehand, something Coulter doesn't mention.
By the way, parts of the policy that Coulter praises were ruled unconstitutional, and cabbies who had their licenses suspended or revoked won a large settlement from the city because, like so many of Giuliani's policies, it overreached and was dictatorially run and was another get-tough measure by a power-hungry Giuliani seeking to become a Senator. Operation Refusal remains in a substantially modified form. It did not cure the problem of taxicab bias, as Coulter implies when she says there is "overwhelming evidence disproving...the yarn about blacks not being able to get a cab in New York."
And did anyone tell Coulter that the program was started because Danny Glover couldn't get a cab? Does Ann Coulter now support Danny Glover?
(By the way, regular readers will notice a different title than usual for Ann Coulter pieces on this merry blog. The Rude Pundit has made this one safe for the kiddies to link to, thus keeping his powder dry for the next time.)
Is It Possible to Shame George W. Bush? (Part of the Positive Politics of Shame Series):
Whenever the Rude Pundit is out at his favorite Hell's Kitchen bar, canoodling with the out-with-the-office-gang Midtowners, he eavesdrops on conversations, hearing every kind of come-on line the horny desk jockeys and salesmen can bring to the gettin' laid game. He's heard the compliment: "Anyone ever tell you your eyes are like (fill in metaphors from stars to some Renaissance painting depending on your education and/or pretentiousness)." He's heard the white-guy-pretending-to-be-ghetto: "Damn, baby, you are smokin'." He's heard the pathetic whine in the night: "Why don't we just talk?" And the heroic shot in the dark: "You wanna go fuck?" Nine times out of ten, most women generally not being idiots, it fails. But ten percent is enough for these corporate tools. Shit, a ten percent return on your investment, that's damn good, they think.
But the Rude Pundit's got the come-on that works a good forty or fifty percent of the time. It's simple and it's gotta be saved until you've gotten a sense of the room, checking out the bar, knowing your crowd, maybe not even using it. It works at gay bars and straight bars, 'cause it's got universal appeal. Marketers with guts would bottle it and sell it to sad bastards who've gone dry for months on end. The line is this: "I've got tequila and ecstasy at my place."
It's direct, honest, and open-ended, leaving the decision to the person it's directed to, allowing them to wonder, "Hmm, am I in the mood for ecstasy, tequila, and all that may follow?" Men and women ultimately respond to honesty and the offer of possible outcomes.
When George W. Bush spoke on Tuesday about the war in Iraq, he was like every asshole in a suit that ever exclaimed, "If I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?" to the last drunk woman talking to the bartender at 3 a.m. It was the same come-on we've heard time and time again, all about the threat of al-Qaeda and a strangely strong Osama bin Laden, justifying himself again and again, but it's just pathetic now, like getting turned down by that 3 a.m. woman. Of course, George W. Bush is such a wad of fuck that he'd be droppin' roofies in her drink, ready to brag to his friends the next day about the hot ass he tapped.
Faced with such shamelessness, we must wonder how George W. Bush can be shamed. The Rude Pundit's been contemplating the idea of shame this week, in the belief that not only does the nation demand George W. Bush's political evisceration, it demands he be brought to his knees and made to kiss the dirt before crying, "Uncle." But what can shame him? Here's a man who looked at Bob Dole, Donna Shalala, and Bob Woodruff with a straight face yesterday, while they were delivering a report ripping the treatment of the fucked-up soldiers coming back every day, and declared, "We owe a wounded solider the very best care and the very best benefits and the very easiest to understand system."
With the Congress about to cite Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten for contempt, with the Senate about to investigate Alberto Gonzales for perjury, with the dessicated corpse of Tony Snow calling Congress "pathetic," what could possibly shame Bush? The answer is to hit him where he is most psychologically weak, with what might possibly rattle that emotionless demeanor. And, as ever, that is for Congress, in its hearings and discussions, to invoke Bush's father as often as possible. Yeah, yeah, George H.W. Bush was a motherfucker in his own right, but Daddy Bush is W's Achilles' heel. We just have to figure out how to fire the arrow.
The opening gambit would be to point to how Daddy backed down from his own executive privilege battle with Congress involving the Attorney General, a subpoena, and possible contempt citations. This was a dispute over documents and the Office of Legal Counsel. Yes, the 1991 dispute was part of a 2003 Congressional research document, but it's time to be more public about it. John Conyers should call Bush I's AG, Dick Thornburgh (another motherfucker for America), and get him to explain why they backed down in the face of a threat of contempt.
More on this tomorrow.
Whenever the Rude Pundit is out at his favorite Hell's Kitchen bar, canoodling with the out-with-the-office-gang Midtowners, he eavesdrops on conversations, hearing every kind of come-on line the horny desk jockeys and salesmen can bring to the gettin' laid game. He's heard the compliment: "Anyone ever tell you your eyes are like (fill in metaphors from stars to some Renaissance painting depending on your education and/or pretentiousness)." He's heard the white-guy-pretending-to-be-ghetto: "Damn, baby, you are smokin'." He's heard the pathetic whine in the night: "Why don't we just talk?" And the heroic shot in the dark: "You wanna go fuck?" Nine times out of ten, most women generally not being idiots, it fails. But ten percent is enough for these corporate tools. Shit, a ten percent return on your investment, that's damn good, they think.
But the Rude Pundit's got the come-on that works a good forty or fifty percent of the time. It's simple and it's gotta be saved until you've gotten a sense of the room, checking out the bar, knowing your crowd, maybe not even using it. It works at gay bars and straight bars, 'cause it's got universal appeal. Marketers with guts would bottle it and sell it to sad bastards who've gone dry for months on end. The line is this: "I've got tequila and ecstasy at my place."
It's direct, honest, and open-ended, leaving the decision to the person it's directed to, allowing them to wonder, "Hmm, am I in the mood for ecstasy, tequila, and all that may follow?" Men and women ultimately respond to honesty and the offer of possible outcomes.
When George W. Bush spoke on Tuesday about the war in Iraq, he was like every asshole in a suit that ever exclaimed, "If I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?" to the last drunk woman talking to the bartender at 3 a.m. It was the same come-on we've heard time and time again, all about the threat of al-Qaeda and a strangely strong Osama bin Laden, justifying himself again and again, but it's just pathetic now, like getting turned down by that 3 a.m. woman. Of course, George W. Bush is such a wad of fuck that he'd be droppin' roofies in her drink, ready to brag to his friends the next day about the hot ass he tapped.
Faced with such shamelessness, we must wonder how George W. Bush can be shamed. The Rude Pundit's been contemplating the idea of shame this week, in the belief that not only does the nation demand George W. Bush's political evisceration, it demands he be brought to his knees and made to kiss the dirt before crying, "Uncle." But what can shame him? Here's a man who looked at Bob Dole, Donna Shalala, and Bob Woodruff with a straight face yesterday, while they were delivering a report ripping the treatment of the fucked-up soldiers coming back every day, and declared, "We owe a wounded solider the very best care and the very best benefits and the very easiest to understand system."
With the Congress about to cite Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten for contempt, with the Senate about to investigate Alberto Gonzales for perjury, with the dessicated corpse of Tony Snow calling Congress "pathetic," what could possibly shame Bush? The answer is to hit him where he is most psychologically weak, with what might possibly rattle that emotionless demeanor. And, as ever, that is for Congress, in its hearings and discussions, to invoke Bush's father as often as possible. Yeah, yeah, George H.W. Bush was a motherfucker in his own right, but Daddy Bush is W's Achilles' heel. We just have to figure out how to fire the arrow.
The opening gambit would be to point to how Daddy backed down from his own executive privilege battle with Congress involving the Attorney General, a subpoena, and possible contempt citations. This was a dispute over documents and the Office of Legal Counsel. Yes, the 1991 dispute was part of a 2003 Congressional research document, but it's time to be more public about it. John Conyers should call Bush I's AG, Dick Thornburgh (another motherfucker for America), and get him to explain why they backed down in the face of a threat of contempt.
More on this tomorrow.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Gonzales Has No Shame, So Shame Miers (Part of the Positive Politics of Shame Series):
Yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales left the Rude Pundit wanting to make Gonzales run pantsless through fetid streets of DC, with citizen after citizen slapping his bare ass, pointing at his tiny dick and laughing, until that quiescent fucker, with his calm, smug little smirk, collapsed by the reflecting pool, with all the tourists pointing and laughing at him. From then on, all anyone would think of when they saw Alberto Gonzales is how his little cock twitched to life whenever he was smacked.
Throughout the whole ordeal (and by "ordeal," the Rude Pundit means for America), Gonzales sat there, implacable, the look of a man who knows his back is gotten, that all of this is just like a pornographic degradation fantasy, where George W. Bush looks on approvingly while Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter try to make him scream through his ball gag as they whip his balls, Gonzales serene knowing that Bush will let him masturbate if he's quiet. In that hearing room, Alberto Gonzales looked like he had a secret hard-on under his table, and, tee-hee, no one knew it but him.
Look at him in his exchange with Chuck Schumer over whether the President ordered him to stick his finger in John Ashcroft's gallbladder surgery incision to get approval for more domestic spying. Look at how he gleefully refuses to answer, only to repeat "We were there on behalf of the President of the United States," getting off on pissing off Schumer. Josh Marshall's right when he says, "It is quite literally contempt of Congress," and he's also right when he titles his post, "Gonzales to Schumer: Blow Me." Of course, this is Gonzales's modus operandi. But, then again, the default position for anyone in the Bush administration is "asshole."
And as disconcerting was his ability to lie without even a bead of sweat developing on his forehead, perhaps confirming his status as an automaton or, like so many others, as one who has sold his soul to Dick Cheney, Gonzales was even more disturbing when he said that he had to check with the White House about whether or not he could answer a question. That's right. The Attorney Fuckin' General, the alleged chief law enforcer in the land, has to see if he has permission to say whether or not Bush told him to annoy Ashcroft (and, again, goddamn them all for making us feel even an ounce of sympathy for John "Cover Those Tits" Ashcroft). Can anyone come up with a reason not to impeach Gonzales?
In the face of such shameful shamelessness, it's time to make the Bush administration sit on the whoopee cushion of justice. Yes, John Conyers and the House Judiciary Committee are playing a great game of chicken, but the ones who win the game are the ones who accept that, after they gun the engine, they're gonna crash. In order to shame the Bush administration properly, it's time to skip over the niceties of the process (we prepare the contempt citation, you defy it, we submit the contempt citation, you claim immunity and block investigation, etc.) and proceed directly to the end of the game, where there's a big fuckin' crash or someone goes into the ditch.
Much has already been written about inherent contempt, that Congress can have someone arrested and brought to Congress to face trial. It will as directly as possible provoke the constitutional crisis we need. It is the first step to shaming the Bush administration, something that is seemingly impossible to do.
And the key to that first step is Harriet Miers in chains, cuffed and frog-marched before the public. That's right: beat up the old lady (yeah, yeah, late-middle-aged, whatever). First of all, Harriet Miers ain't a sympathetic figure. In the White House, she was as incompetent as they come, a glorified clerical assistant. Outside the White House, where she was far more effective as a lawyer, she was always defending major corporations. The right hates her; the left doesn't give a shit. Drag her out of her office, fuckin' extraordinary rendition her ass from Texas to DC, hooded and everything, showing her what a motherfucking subpoena means. Try her, jail her, make Bush have to pardon her.
Oh, you may say, Rude Pundit, this will have the exact opposite effect - it will embolden the Bush administration, make them say Congress is out of control, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, but the real message it sends is this: if the Congress is willing to do this to poor Harriet Miers, what do you think is waiting for Karl Rove?
More tomorrow on the steps to shame.
Yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales left the Rude Pundit wanting to make Gonzales run pantsless through fetid streets of DC, with citizen after citizen slapping his bare ass, pointing at his tiny dick and laughing, until that quiescent fucker, with his calm, smug little smirk, collapsed by the reflecting pool, with all the tourists pointing and laughing at him. From then on, all anyone would think of when they saw Alberto Gonzales is how his little cock twitched to life whenever he was smacked.
Throughout the whole ordeal (and by "ordeal," the Rude Pundit means for America), Gonzales sat there, implacable, the look of a man who knows his back is gotten, that all of this is just like a pornographic degradation fantasy, where George W. Bush looks on approvingly while Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter try to make him scream through his ball gag as they whip his balls, Gonzales serene knowing that Bush will let him masturbate if he's quiet. In that hearing room, Alberto Gonzales looked like he had a secret hard-on under his table, and, tee-hee, no one knew it but him.
Look at him in his exchange with Chuck Schumer over whether the President ordered him to stick his finger in John Ashcroft's gallbladder surgery incision to get approval for more domestic spying. Look at how he gleefully refuses to answer, only to repeat "We were there on behalf of the President of the United States," getting off on pissing off Schumer. Josh Marshall's right when he says, "It is quite literally contempt of Congress," and he's also right when he titles his post, "Gonzales to Schumer: Blow Me." Of course, this is Gonzales's modus operandi. But, then again, the default position for anyone in the Bush administration is "asshole."
And as disconcerting was his ability to lie without even a bead of sweat developing on his forehead, perhaps confirming his status as an automaton or, like so many others, as one who has sold his soul to Dick Cheney, Gonzales was even more disturbing when he said that he had to check with the White House about whether or not he could answer a question. That's right. The Attorney Fuckin' General, the alleged chief law enforcer in the land, has to see if he has permission to say whether or not Bush told him to annoy Ashcroft (and, again, goddamn them all for making us feel even an ounce of sympathy for John "Cover Those Tits" Ashcroft). Can anyone come up with a reason not to impeach Gonzales?
In the face of such shameful shamelessness, it's time to make the Bush administration sit on the whoopee cushion of justice. Yes, John Conyers and the House Judiciary Committee are playing a great game of chicken, but the ones who win the game are the ones who accept that, after they gun the engine, they're gonna crash. In order to shame the Bush administration properly, it's time to skip over the niceties of the process (we prepare the contempt citation, you defy it, we submit the contempt citation, you claim immunity and block investigation, etc.) and proceed directly to the end of the game, where there's a big fuckin' crash or someone goes into the ditch.
Much has already been written about inherent contempt, that Congress can have someone arrested and brought to Congress to face trial. It will as directly as possible provoke the constitutional crisis we need. It is the first step to shaming the Bush administration, something that is seemingly impossible to do.
And the key to that first step is Harriet Miers in chains, cuffed and frog-marched before the public. That's right: beat up the old lady (yeah, yeah, late-middle-aged, whatever). First of all, Harriet Miers ain't a sympathetic figure. In the White House, she was as incompetent as they come, a glorified clerical assistant. Outside the White House, where she was far more effective as a lawyer, she was always defending major corporations. The right hates her; the left doesn't give a shit. Drag her out of her office, fuckin' extraordinary rendition her ass from Texas to DC, hooded and everything, showing her what a motherfucking subpoena means. Try her, jail her, make Bush have to pardon her.
Oh, you may say, Rude Pundit, this will have the exact opposite effect - it will embolden the Bush administration, make them say Congress is out of control, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, but the real message it sends is this: if the Congress is willing to do this to poor Harriet Miers, what do you think is waiting for Karl Rove?
More tomorrow on the steps to shame.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
The Positive Politics of Shame, Part 1.2: The Flintstones Paradigm:
Let's put this in terms that conservatives might understand: whenever Wilma Flintstone and Betty Rubble were about to go on a spending tear throughout the boutiques and department stores of Bedrock, they'd announce, like the cavalry coming into an Indian village, "Charrrrge it," and then go nuts. And who would have to deal with the results of them buying all the saber-toothed tiger skin coats and baby mammoth vacuum cleaners? Fred and Barney. See, Fred Flintstone would get his little gravestone-like statements from, what the hell, American Rex-press, and he'd wanna know what all his hard-earned cash at the Slate Rock and Gravel Company went to. Jesus, you work the goddamn dino-crane at a motherfuckin' quarry all day and you're gonna be pissed when your wife blows the wad.
And would you begrudge Fred Flintstone his anger? Would you say it's wrong for him to wanna know how Wilma spent the budget that he appropriated? Would you say that about Lucy and Desi? About Ward and June? About Ralph and Alice? (Well, maybe not Ralph and Alice - she'd take that fat fuck apart like he's made of lardy Tinkertoys.)
Congressional oversight does the same thing. Yeah, Congress approves a budget - the "power of the purse," as it's constantly called now. But once the purse is open, it doesn't mean go crazy. Here's a little something from Section 9 of Article 1: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." Now, hundreds of billions of dollars in expenditures takes a little more time to review than your average checking account statement. It might take committees of people who appropriated the money, staffs of those committees, and cooperation from those who got the cash.
See, one way to think about Congressional hearings into the activities of the White House, the various departments, the military, and more is that it's figuring out if the money was spent right, balancing the thousand-page check book, if you want. If, say, Karl Rove is using the time and space and personnel of various offices to hold meetings about elections, well, shit, that doesn't seem like the money's being used in the way it was budgeted. And if the Attorney General fires people because they weren't willing to purge voter rolls in the way the White House wanted, it's possible to see that as misusing funds. It's the job of Congress to make sure the budget follows all the rules and regulations and limits of that big ass document put out every time some appropriation is passed (and signed by the President). If the White House doesn't want to give Congress information about the Department of Justice or the Pentagon, then the White House is saying to Congress, "Fuck you. Just give us the fucking money and go about your little business of giving us more money." And that's pretty much eliminating the role of Congress.
In this context, nearly everything Congress investigates can be boiled down to wanting to know how the funding it appropriated is spent, from Katrina to Pat Tillman to the wars to goddamn postage meters. Why, why, dear right wingers, would you want to block the budgeter from knowing where the money goes? Unless, of course, it's about Al Gore allegedly making a couple of phone calls from his office, right? And if you want the money spent a different way, without oversight, just a mad dash to the treasure chest to see who can be corrupted by its gold, then change the rules, even amend the Constitution.
Instead, put yourself in Fred Flintstone's calloused feet. You can't get the money back. And no matter how many times you've told Wilma to keep the credit rock in the purse, she goes on a spending spree. You need to make sure that Wilma learns a lesson. You're a fuckin' caveman, and it's time to act like one. You know how to handle this. Ask Fred Flintstone: you've never done any real fucking until you've put your pebbles in the bam-bam of a hot prehistoric babe tied prone to a granite slab.
It's time for Congress to go all Neanderthal on the White House's ass.
Note: Yeah, yeah, the Rude Pundit promised Harriet Miers in chains today (so cold at the thought), but he wanted to wait until after today's Alberto Gonzales toad-fest at the Senate.
Let's put this in terms that conservatives might understand: whenever Wilma Flintstone and Betty Rubble were about to go on a spending tear throughout the boutiques and department stores of Bedrock, they'd announce, like the cavalry coming into an Indian village, "Charrrrge it," and then go nuts. And who would have to deal with the results of them buying all the saber-toothed tiger skin coats and baby mammoth vacuum cleaners? Fred and Barney. See, Fred Flintstone would get his little gravestone-like statements from, what the hell, American Rex-press, and he'd wanna know what all his hard-earned cash at the Slate Rock and Gravel Company went to. Jesus, you work the goddamn dino-crane at a motherfuckin' quarry all day and you're gonna be pissed when your wife blows the wad.
And would you begrudge Fred Flintstone his anger? Would you say it's wrong for him to wanna know how Wilma spent the budget that he appropriated? Would you say that about Lucy and Desi? About Ward and June? About Ralph and Alice? (Well, maybe not Ralph and Alice - she'd take that fat fuck apart like he's made of lardy Tinkertoys.)
Congressional oversight does the same thing. Yeah, Congress approves a budget - the "power of the purse," as it's constantly called now. But once the purse is open, it doesn't mean go crazy. Here's a little something from Section 9 of Article 1: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." Now, hundreds of billions of dollars in expenditures takes a little more time to review than your average checking account statement. It might take committees of people who appropriated the money, staffs of those committees, and cooperation from those who got the cash.
See, one way to think about Congressional hearings into the activities of the White House, the various departments, the military, and more is that it's figuring out if the money was spent right, balancing the thousand-page check book, if you want. If, say, Karl Rove is using the time and space and personnel of various offices to hold meetings about elections, well, shit, that doesn't seem like the money's being used in the way it was budgeted. And if the Attorney General fires people because they weren't willing to purge voter rolls in the way the White House wanted, it's possible to see that as misusing funds. It's the job of Congress to make sure the budget follows all the rules and regulations and limits of that big ass document put out every time some appropriation is passed (and signed by the President). If the White House doesn't want to give Congress information about the Department of Justice or the Pentagon, then the White House is saying to Congress, "Fuck you. Just give us the fucking money and go about your little business of giving us more money." And that's pretty much eliminating the role of Congress.
In this context, nearly everything Congress investigates can be boiled down to wanting to know how the funding it appropriated is spent, from Katrina to Pat Tillman to the wars to goddamn postage meters. Why, why, dear right wingers, would you want to block the budgeter from knowing where the money goes? Unless, of course, it's about Al Gore allegedly making a couple of phone calls from his office, right? And if you want the money spent a different way, without oversight, just a mad dash to the treasure chest to see who can be corrupted by its gold, then change the rules, even amend the Constitution.
Instead, put yourself in Fred Flintstone's calloused feet. You can't get the money back. And no matter how many times you've told Wilma to keep the credit rock in the purse, she goes on a spending spree. You need to make sure that Wilma learns a lesson. You're a fuckin' caveman, and it's time to act like one. You know how to handle this. Ask Fred Flintstone: you've never done any real fucking until you've put your pebbles in the bam-bam of a hot prehistoric babe tied prone to a granite slab.
It's time for Congress to go all Neanderthal on the White House's ass.
Note: Yeah, yeah, the Rude Pundit promised Harriet Miers in chains today (so cold at the thought), but he wanted to wait until after today's Alberto Gonzales toad-fest at the Senate.
Monday, July 23, 2007
John Edwards Will Fuck Your Shit Up:
John Aravosis is right: John Edwards' YouTube video is absolutely kick-ass. It takes the bullshit tossed at him from the right and tosses it right back at them. If this is what he would have done to the Swift Boat Vets, then Kerry was even more of a fuckin' idiot not to listen to his running mate in 2004.
By the way, annoying as this YouTube debate thing on CNN could have been, it's far better than it has any right to be.
John Aravosis is right: John Edwards' YouTube video is absolutely kick-ass. It takes the bullshit tossed at him from the right and tosses it right back at them. If this is what he would have done to the Swift Boat Vets, then Kerry was even more of a fuckin' idiot not to listen to his running mate in 2004.
By the way, annoying as this YouTube debate thing on CNN could have been, it's far better than it has any right to be.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)